2000 (10) TMI 320 - AT - Customs

Tribunal grants waiver, remands for de novo consideration, stresses fair hearing

RICHIMEN SILKS LIMITED Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, HYDERABAD

RICHIMEN SILKS LIMITED Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, HYDERABAD - 2001 (127) E.L.T. 795 (Tri. - Chennai) Issues:1. Dismissal of appeal under Section 129E for non pre-deposit of duty amount.2. Lack of hearing before passing interim and final orders.3. Validity of unsigned adjudication order.4. Consideration of pre-deposit amount for waiver of pre-deposit.Issue 1: Dismissal of appeal under Section 129E for non pre-deposit of duty amount:The appeal arose from the dismissal under Section 129E of the Act due to the non-pre-deposit of duty amount by the appellants. The appellants contended that they were not heard before the interim or final orders of dismissal were passed. The Tribunal noted that the appeal was dismissed without granting an opportunity of hearing while disposing of the stay petition. The appellants had already pre-deposited a significant amount as per the Andhra Pradesh High Court's order, which had not been considered. Therefore, the Tribunal allowed the stay application by granting a waiver of pre-deposit and remanded the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) for de novo consideration.Issue 2: Lack of hearing before passing interim and final orders:The appellants argued that a stay application cannot be summarily decided without a hearing. They emphasized that all aspects of the matter, including prima facie case, merits, and financial hardship, should be considered in the interim order after granting a personal hearing. The Tribunal agreed with the appellants, stating that the appeal was dismissed without granting an opportunity of hearing. The Tribunal directed the Commissioner to hear the appellants on the stay petition and consider all pleas raised by them on merits and financial hardship, emphasizing the importance of a speaking order.Issue 3: Validity of unsigned adjudication order:The Tribunal highlighted that an adjudication order is required to be signed by the Adjudicator and issued. Referring to a previous judgment, the Tribunal noted that an unsigned order is considered invalid. Therefore, the Tribunal held that the order in question needed to be set aside due to this reason. The lack of a signed order was a significant factor in the decision to remand the matter for de novo consideration.Issue 4: Consideration of pre-deposit amount for waiver of pre-deposit:The appellants had pre-deposited a substantial amount as per the Andhra Pradesh High Court's order, which had not been taken into account when the appeal was dismissed for non-deposit. The Tribunal directed the Commissioner to accept this pre-deposit amount and consider it while granting a hearing on the stay application. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of considering the pre-deposit already made and instructed the Commissioner to hear the appeal on merits if deemed appropriate. The matter was remanded for de novo consideration, taking into account the pre-deposit amount and ensuring a fair hearing for the appellants.